ELEVENTH SESSION OF THE UN SIXTH COMMITTEE AD HOC

UNCLAS USUN NEW YORK 000139

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: UNSC PREL PTER
SUBJECT: ELEVENTH SESSION OF THE UN SIXTH COMMITTEE AD HOC
COUNTER-TERRORISM COMMITTEE


1. (SBU) BEGIN SUMMARY: The eleventh session of the Ad Hoc
Committee met on February 5, 6, and 15. Delegations
discussed completion of the comprehensive convention; the
proposal to convene a high-level conference on
counter-terrorism; and the status of intersessional informal
negotiations; and adopted its report. The Ad Hoc Committee
recommended that the Sixth Committee 1) establish a working
group at the sixty-second session of the Assembly with a view
to finalizing the draft comprehensive convention and 2)
continue to discuss the question of convening a high-level
conference under the auspices of the United Nations. END
SUMMARY.


2. (SBU) During the first plenary meeting of the Ad Hoc
Committee, delegations reiterated their condemnation of
international terrorism in all its forms and the need for
international cooperation to counter terrorism. Delegations
stressed that the fight against terrorism should be conducted
in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations and
relevant international law. Concern was raised by some
delegations regarding the use of a double standard in the
fight against terrorism and some stressed the need to address
terrorism's root causes.

--------------
Draft Comprehensive Convention
--------------


3. (SBU) Delegations welcomed this session of the Ad Hoc
Committee as an opportunity to agree upon outstanding issues
in the text of the Comprehensive Convention. Delegations
said that the completion of the convention would be a
significant contribution to the existing counter-terrorism
legal framework. Some delegations noted their commitment to
reaching an agreement on the text of the draft convention.
(European Union, United States, Japan). Delegations
reiterated the importance they attached to the convention,
however, concerns were raised about the text and scope of the
current draft. The Democratic People's Republic of Korea
noted that acts of state terrorism were a serious concern to
the international community, and expressed the view that any
comprehensive convention must include "state terrorism." As
in previous years, some delegations emphasized the need for a
legal definition of terrorism (Organization of Islamic
Conference, Morocco, Cuba, Libya). Some of these and other
delegations underscored the importance of distinguishing
between terrorism and the legitimate struggle of a people for
self-determination (Organization of Islamic Conference,
CARICOM, Libya).

--------------
Question of Convening a High-Level Conference
--------------


4. (SBU) During the first plenary meeting of the Ad Hoc
Committee, some delegations reiterated their full support for
the convening of a high-level conference on counter-terrorism
in Egypt. Other delegations said they would consider a
conference after the completion of the comprehensive
convention.


5. (SBU) Informal consultations were held on February 6 to
discuss the Egyptian proposal to convene a high-level
conference. As in previous years, Egypt expressed a desire
to hold this conference irrespective of the completion of the
comprehensive convention. The Egyptian delegation noted that
the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries had endorsed the
proposal for the conference in 2006. Egypt urged that the
convening of the conference not be tied to the completion of
the convention, as some of the topics discussed at the
conference would not be addressed by the Convention.
Furthermore, Egypt submitted that the conference would
present an opportunity for dialogue, through which
differences of opinion might be eliminated.


6. (SBU) Some delegates supported the proposal to convene
the conference notwithstanding completion of the convention
(Pakistan and Indonesia). Other delegates reiterated their
support for the Egyptian proposal in principle; however,
noted that the proposal should be considered only after the
finalization of the draft convention (European Union and
India).

--------------
Intersessional Informal Contacts
--------------


7. (SBU) Ms. Maria Telalian (Greece),Committee
Vice-Chairman, briefed the Committee on the informal
intersessional bilateral contacts, which took place during
January-February 2007. Intersessional contacts took the form
of informal meetings with individual delegations and focused


on outstanding issues concerning the draft comprehensive
convention. The US delegation met with the Chairman and
Vice-Chairman during the session and reiterated our position
on the text. Telalian informed the delegation that she
planned to present a compromise text for delegations'
consideration (paragraph 10).


8. (SBU) On February 9, the Vice-Chairperson presented the
compromise text below, which she characterized as "elements
of an overall package." She explained that the language of
the preamble was based on language contained in the Terrorist
Bombings and Nuclear Terrorism Conventions and is intended to
affirm that there are existing rules of international law
that are applicable to military forces of a state acting in
official duties.


9. (SBU) Telalian affirmed that paragraph 3 of article 18
was intended to cover both substantive and procedural
aspects, and that the phrase "inasmuch as they are governed
by other rules of international law" comprised both lawful
and unlawful conduct under international law. Together with
paragraph 3, paragraph 4 was to be understood as meaning that
it did not make lawful, otherwise unlawful acts. Moreover,
such conduct, if unlawful, did not preclude prosecution under
other laws. Telalian noted that to further clarify this
prohibition against impunity, paragraph 4 had been amended to
include the word "punishable." The addition was to underscore
that that there is an inner core of offenses that remain
punishable irrespective of the regime that would apply.


10. (SBU) Telalian explained that the newly added paragraph
5 consisted of a general statement with regard to rules of
international law applicable for certain acts that would be
lawful under international humanitarian law. TelalianQtressed that it would be up to the parties to the convention
and the judicial authorities to interpret the paragraph in
light of the circumstances of specific cases. Parties would
have to determine the relationship between the convention and
international humanitarian law in accordance to the
circumstances particular to each case.

BEGIN TEXT
Preamble
Noting that the activities of military forces of States are
governed by rules of international law outside the framework
of this Convention and that the exclusion of certain actions
from the coverage of this Convention does not condone or make
lawful otherwise unlawful acts, or preclude prosecution under
other laws,

Text relating to article 18 of the draft comprehensive
convention:


1. Nothing in this Convention shall affect other rights,
obligations and responsibilities of States, peoples and
individuals under international law, in particular the
purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations,
and international humanitarian law.


2. The activities of armed forces during an armed conflict,
as those terms are understood under international
humanitarian law, which are governed by that law, are not
governed by this Convention.


3. The activities undertaken by the military forces of a
State in the exercise of their official duties, inasmuch as
they are governed by other rules of international law, are
not governed by this Convention.


4. Nothing in this article condones or makes lawful
otherwise unlawful acts, nor precludes prosecution under
other laws; acts that would amount to an offense as defined
in article 2 of this Convention remain punishable under such
laws.


5. This Convention is without prejudice to the rules of
international law applicable in armed conflict, in particular
those rules applicable to acts lawful under international
humanitarian law. END TEXT.

WOLFF